[Sivad]

1. Broken window policing works.

Depends on how it's implemented. I think it should left up to the local community to decide how their neighborhoods are policed and which problems are prioritized.

2. Community oversight is a good idea, and is supposed to be what democracy is about to begin with.

I think we need to go beyond just oversight and give local communities full fiscal and administrative control.

3. It's already limited, but it's possible to use more non-lethal force--although it's not always effective either.

I think all patrol cops should be stripped of their firearms and tactical teams should be under the control of elected community councils where they can only be activated with direct council approval.

4. This would work if combined with #6. We need the surveillance footage, because both perpetrators and police lie constantly.

Police departments should not have internal affairs divisions, there should be a separate and independent organization that investigates police misconduct. There should also be a separate office independent of the DA that is solely responsible for prosecuting cops.

6. This has been a great improvement, and something Obama should get credit for.

The problem is the police departments still control the video, local communities should be in control of the video.

7. Already lots of that.

Not nearly enough.

8. Eliminating civil asset forfeiture; and/or, eliminating sovereign immunity for its abuse would help.

That would be a good start but we also need to abolish quotas and bullshit fees and fines.

9. Yes, and that can go back to training. It wouldn't surprise me if this recent incident was military training overriding police training.

I think just going back to the old style uniforms with shiny shoes and big hats and bowties would curb a lot of that urban commando shit.

10. I'm not sure what that would do, but I'm mostly for eliminating government employee unions.

Police unions have used their influence to establish unfair protections for police officers in their contracts with local, state and federal government and in statewide Law Enforcement Officers' Bills of Rights. These provisions create one set of rules for police and another for civilians, and make it difficult for Police Chiefs or civilian oversight structures to punish police officers who are unfit to serve.
These provisions:

Remove barriers to effective misconduct investigations and civilian oversight

Remove contract provisions, local policies, and provisions in state Law Enforcement Officers' Bills of Rights laws that:

allow officers to wait 48 hours or more before being interrogated after an incident

prevent investigators from pursuing other cases of misconduct revealed during an investigation

prevent an officer's name or picture from being released to the public

prohibit civilians from having the power to discipline, subpoena or interrogate police officers

state that the Police Chief has the sole authority to discipline police officers

enable officers to appeal a disciplinary decision to a hearing board of other police officers

enable officers to use the contract grievance process to have an outside arbitrator reverse disciplinary decisions and reinstate officers who have committed misconduct

prevent an officer from being investigated for an incident that happened 100 or more days prior

allow an officer to choose not to take a lie detector test without being punished, require the civilian who is accusing that officer of misconduct to pass a lie detector first, or prevent the officer's test results from being considered as evidence of misconduct

Keep officers' disciplinary history accessible to police departments and the public

Remove contract provisions, local and state policies, and provisions in state Law Enforcement Officers' Bills of Rights laws that allow police officers to:

expunge or destroy records of past misconduct (both sustained and unsustained) from their disciplinary file

prevent their disciplinary records from being released to the public via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request



Ensure financial accountability for officers and police departments that kill or seriously injure civilians

Remove contract provisions, local policies, and provisions in state Law Enforcement Officers' Bills of Rights laws that:

require officers to be given paid administrative leave or paid desk-duty during an investigation following a police shooting or other use of deadly force

prevent officers from receiving unpaid suspensions as discipline for misconduct or allow officers to use vacation or discretionary time to pay themselves while on suspension

allow officers to receive paid leave or paid desk-duty after being charged with a felony offense

https://www.joincampaignzero.org/contracts

[blackjack21]

You were extolling the virtues of it and saying how it would be preferable..?

I don't believe I said that either. I did say that diverse societies tend not to work very well. South Africa's apartheid regime was replaced and now has a black government where politicians want to take money and property away from white people without just compensation. I guess that's not too different from our Democratic party now that I think of it.

Okay I'm not saying you are, but you are defending them along with apartheid SA. Which rubbishes your argument..

If you said Hitler was a steak-eating fool, I would point out that he was a vegetarian. That doesn't make me a Nazi.

they're quire explicit in their aims, we know exactly what they are about...

Any shit disturber can go into a crowd and give the Bellamy salute. I don't see any "Proud Boys" logos. Note that the guy in the first picture is standing right next to a black guy with another black guy behind him and one on his right/our over the top with the "black power" fist in the air? Don't you find it odd that there are blacks and gay men in the Proud Boys? They allow all religions too. Other than Western chauvinism, what is it that you think they are about?

I know the Bellamy salute is spooky to Europeans, but my parents generation grew up saluting the flag that way until 1942.

Marching along with this at the 'unite the right rally'

Can you tell me which ones are the proud boys? I'm sorry, I find the right wingers to be quite comical. It just makes me laugh.

And they'll probably contribute just fine seeing as they do quite well in the US of A, despite your racist shit.. and it is racist by the way.

They do just fine in the United States, but they also commit a little more than half of all our violent crimes--way out of proportion to the population at large. As I said in posting Pastor White Mike's video, this sort of behavior is encouraged by the media in the United States which is almost universally owned by liberals and staffed by leftists.

Stalin would be proud of you comrade blackjack, send them to the gulag at once!

So would Hitler, Truman, Roosevelt, and Lincoln. The difference is like Truman, Roosevelt and Lincoln, I would let them out after they are stable and can work. Drug treatment in lieu of prison is a much better solution than what we have now. Although, some people are cool with drug addicts lying unconscious homeless in the street shitting their pants with needles hanging out of their arms. I personally think it's a blight on our society.

The US prescribes more opiods, because the pharmaceutical companies bought off the Clinton administration, and nobody did anything to stop it until Trump. Overdoses and deaths from illegal opiod use is higher in the United States, because fentanyl is far more powerful and users often administer the same amount of fentanyl as they would opium or heroin, which more or less kills them instantly. 90% of that comes into the US via Mexico, and undoubtedly many of our politicians are financially vested in the drug trade. Nancy Pelosi's father was reportedly allowing heroin into the US via Baltimore's ports. FBI Files: Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi’s Father Thomas D’Alesandro Jr. Was “Constant Companion” Of Notorious Mobster Benjamin Magliano, Revealed: JFK Worried Pelosi's Dad Was Associated With Organized Crime

For a little added humor on racism, Nancy Pelosi’s Dirty Family Secret Just Came Out..See It Before It’s Buried

The Democrats have a very poor history on civil rights issues and Nancy Pelosi’s father was one of the people who dedicated statues of Robert E. Lee and “Stonewall” Jackson, and in his speech said that they defended “sacred institutions.” This information can’t be news to Pelosi, but she has refused to acknowledge her family history.

[Presvias]

1. Basically you did extol the virtues of it vis a vis subsequent SA society... in short form.
2. I never said you were but you are defending them are you not?
3. So they didn't march with nazis then?
4. ^ Same as above..
5. So..no macho cultural musclehead problem among whites as well then? Oh silly me it must have been imaginary..
6. Just pure silliness and really not even worth a customary glance really.

Where's your proof?

[maz]

Is it the police who need their guns taken away, or just the white police officers?

Something to consider. I think disarming white people would be more effective overall. They can't control their urge to kill their fellow citizens.

What about the non-white officers who gun down little white boys and rape women and break the arms of 15 year-old girls?

These stories never receive the kind of headlines as when a white officer kills a black person.

Cops who 'murdered' a six-year-old boy were moonlighting for maverick local force run by a school BUS DRIVER - and officers refuse to say why they chased unarmed dad and killed his son

Jeremy Mardis, six, was shot dead by state marshals on Tuesday night
•Autistic boy was in the passenger seat of his father Chris Few's vehicle
•Lt. Derrick Stafford, 32, and Norris Greenhouse Jr., moonlighting as marshals who serve warrants, carry firearms and have police powers
•'That little boy was buckled in the front seat of that vehicle and that is how he died,' Col. Mike Edmonson said. 'He didn't deserve to die like that'
•Few is heavily sedated, unable to talk and has bullet fragments lodged in his brain and lung

Lt. Derrick Stafford


Norris Greenhouse Jr., 23


Louisiana State Policecharged the city marshals that killed six-year-old autistic boy Jeremy Mardis (pictured) and critically injured his father Chris Few with second-degree murder

It has since emerged that in October, 2011, Lt. Derrick Stafford was indicted by a Rapides Parish grand jury on two counts of aggravated rape, reports KATC - the station says it is waiting for records to see exactly how it was resolved.

The station also reported he has five pending civil lawsuits involving him in Avoyelles Parish and Norris Greenhouse Jr. was also named in several of the suits.

One of the cases alleges that while arresting a woman involves Stafford Tasered her without warning while she was cuffed in the back of the car.

Another case claims while breaking up a fight between two girls, Stafford allegedly pulled a 15-year-old girls' arms behind her back and apparently broke her arm.

KATC reports the pair are named in a July lawsuit filed in federal court along with five other Marksville police officers regarding an arrest of a man at a festival which ended up with him being Tasered.

[SpecialOlympian]

What about the non-white officers who gun down little white boys and rape women and break the arms of 15 year-old girls?

Still inherently better than white people, who are murderous spawns of Yakub bred for malice.

Some people become bad. Some inferior races, such as whites, are born evil. There's a difference.

I can tell that pointing out the inherently violent and murderous nature of whites annoys Maz. Maz is an ignorant man, as evidenced by his white supremacist views. But the benefits of white genocide aren't an opinion, they are fact. Anyone who does the research will come to the conclusion that white genocide is just a plain ole' good idea, and it's clear from Maz's posts that he has done no research at all.

Also I suspect from Maz's petty nature and terrible writing style that he is white and therefore, due to his innate compulsion to lie and murder, is incapable of accepting ethical ideas such as white genocide.

[blackjack21]

1. Basically you did extol the virtues of it vis a vis subsequent SA society... in short form.

These are leaps in logic happening in your own mind. Apartheid South Africa sucked, because it was exploitative and racist. Post-Apartheid Africa sucks, because it became lawless with the government becoming the largest thief in the country.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry dance with well-wishers in township dubbed South Africa's 'murder capital' on first day of epic tour - while baby Archie recovers from overnight flight from Britain

2. I never said you were but you are defending them are you not?

Insofar as labelling everyone that disagrees with the political left as racist, sexist, homophobe, islamophobe, xenophobe and so forth. Proud Boys are fraternal, so I guess you could call them sexist. However, they have people of different races, sexual orientations, and religions. So it's not a 1:1 fit for neo-Nazism by any stretch of the imagination.

3. So they didn't march with nazis then?

No clue. I don't know how to identify a proud boy. The neo-nazis usually display their colors with pride. Marching with the neo-nazis as a separate group doesn't make you a neo-nazi either. Neo-nazis like clean drinking water. If you are marching for clean drinking water and neo-nazis show up to support clean drinking water, that doesn't make you a neo-nazi. It just means that you share something in common with neo-nazis.

5. So..no macho cultural musclehead problem among whites as well then? Oh silly me it must have been imaginary..

As a whole? No. Among the proud boys? No. Maybe in Texas or Montana. It's just not the norm for white men in the USA these days.

These stories never receive the kind of headlines as when a white officer kills a black person.

Even the white police officer stories are fading, because the videos show that a lot of the complaints are materially false.

Presvias has not even demonstrated that this shooting was racially motivated. All we know is that the officer went to check out the house, did not announce his presence as police, he was heard by the homeowner who had a gun (lawfully), and he opened fire on her killing her. He was white and she was black. That does not establish a racially motivated killing.

[Sivad]

What about smartlocks on police firearms that can only be disabled remotely? Cops would have to request permission to activate their firearms. That seems like a reasonable measure at this point. It wouldn't completely disarm them of lethal force but it would prevent misuse and abuse.

[BigSteve]

What about smartlocks on police firearms that can only be disabled remotely? Cops would have to request permission to activate their firearms. That seems like a reasonable measure at this point. It wouldn't completely disarm them of lethal force but it would prevent misuse and abuse.

That's got to be the single dumbest fucking thing ever posted to PoFo.

We shouldn't try to be disarming the police, which is what you are effectively suggesting.

At what point would it be appropriate for a police officer for permission to use his firearm? Would it be before or after the guy the cop just pulled over draws a .357 and starts firing at the cop? Would it be before or after some BLM-supporting scumbag starts shooting at cops?

Seriously, yours is a monumentally stupid idea...

[Sivad]

Yet there is some evidence that disarming the police might be less dangerous that it sounds. According to statistics compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, of the 27 law enforcement officers murdered in 2013 in the line of duty, only 6 were able to fire their weapons at assailants. Another two were killed after their firearms were stolen and used against them. (Note: several dozen other officers died while on duty during this time, the majority from car accidents.) In many cases, it seems arming officers isn’t a black and white issue of officer safety. Especially since the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report reports that 461 people were shot and killed by police in 2013.

https://qz.com/602682/the-case-for-disa ... ice-force/




Disarmament and safety

The common argument against disarmament is that police need guns. But for what? Most police never use them. Even in the higher-crime 1990s, nearly 95% of New York City officers had never fired their weapon in the line of duty (Rostker et al. 1998). And during most violent crimes—an armed mugging, for instance—the police are not at the scene, often arriving well past the event. What police do day to day—patrolling neighborhoods, substituting for an inadequate mental health system, conducting traffic stops, calming disputes, and filling out paperwork—not only doesn’t need a gun, but is safer done without one.

Take traffic stops. Currently, they can be high-risk, mutually stressful events, civilians and police each fearing the other is armed and will fire in an instant. If the police had no guns, the most lawless driver in a stolen car might… drive away, and the officer would already have reported the license plate number.

Disarming police would also change interactions with mentally ill people. A Portland Press Herald investigation found half of police-shooting victims had mental health problems. In 2014, at least 14 mentally ill people were shot by police, often after parents or other caretakers called seeking help, not lethal force. When police arrived, the victims failed to immediately follow police commands. In several notorious cases in Texas, Florida, and North Carolina, they were shot by police within seconds of police arriving at their home. In a case in Houston, police shot a mentally disturbed man who was a double amputee in a wheelchair, after he waved a “shiny object” that turned out to be a pen. As Nevada journalist and editor D. Brian Burghart concluded after a two-year effort to catalog all police shootings nationwide, “You know who dies in the most population-dense areas? Black men. You know who dies in the least population-dense areas? Mentally ill men” (Burghart 2014). Indeed, officers in Norway, where police are unarmed, revealed to researchers that a significant concern with arming police was that more mentally ill people would be killed (Hendy 2014). As recent efforts to rethink police training acknowledge (Apuzzo 2015), fatal shootings could be dramatically reduced by limiting the ready ability of police to use deadly force. The most logical limitation at hand is obvious and simple enough: disarm the police.

A disarmed civil police force

Scores of city workers perform police work without guns. Parks police write citations, often unarmed. Campus police patiently keep the peace over thousands of often drunk and rowdy college students without guns (probably because most universities want to avoid the consequences of the contentious situations that guns foster). What about venturing into a building to find evidence of wrongdoing? Building inspectors do it every day with no more than a flashlight. Paramedics and firefighters go uninvited into houses, melees, protests. Token clerks, bus drivers, and social workers enforce rules, drive through dangerous neighborhoods, and assist and report on psychologically unstable people, all with no guns.

At least in New York City, a few guns at the precinct house would be only a few minutes from the rare armed threat, much as patrolling officers typically are. In remote areas, citizens would be better off if guns were in the trunk rather than on officers’ utility belt. In Norway, for example, officers must obtain permission before removing their guns from their cars. This “Norwegian delay” has been credited with lower levels of shootings; It led armed forces in neighboring Denmark to organize “stop and think” training that encourages officers to withdraw from a conflict, secure the scene, regroup, and confer with other officers before seeking to resolve a dangerous situation (Hendy 2014, pp. 186–187).

https://www.metropolitiques.eu/Disarm-the-Police.html